The First Amendment Right To Shove Pregnant Women

This week the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision ruled that there is a free speech right guaranteed in the Constitution to shove pregnant women. What after all are the buffer zones for except against harassment of doctors and patients. After all, the law was enacted in “response to a history of harassment and violence at abortion clinics in Massachusetts, including a shooting rampage at two facilities in 1994.”

We know the ruling will lead to more pushing and shoving of pregnant women who want health care. We know it will lead to doctors being less safe. We know that it will mean more violence, because violent groups with a history of violence attempting to do violence to women (and there’s no other way to call forcing them to remain pregnant against their will).

Freedom!

As Voltaire would have said about this ruling, “I may not agree with your shoving a pregnant woman, but I will defend to death your right to do it.”

Share:

Related

Comments

I’ve never understood the anti-abortion crowd. Yes, abortion may not be the perfect solution, but it is something that should be available. The anti-abortion crowd reminds me of that goofy church that show up at military funerals and makes asses of themselves over gay people. The Old Testament crowd is just plain whacky.

Do not expect the corrupted Dems to stand up for women or anyone else. We need to build movements that will not stand for this kind of outrageous abuse against women. B/c we all have sex, but it is only women who have to do the perp walk for the “freedom” of the ignorant and malicious right wing superstitionists.

As far as I know, shoving is still assault. In baseball, you can get in the umpire’s face, but if you touch him you’re in serious trouble. It’ll be interesting to see how this ruling plays out — for sure, we can expect more aggressive protests at abortion clinics — but unwanted physical touching is still a crime and if protesters block access you can call the police.

In WA we don’t have buffer zone laws that this ruling will affect. The affected laws were for public property. Planned Parenthood in Spokane has to have a fenced parking lot on private property to keep the crazies out. Trespassing laws don’t have a first amendment problem.I would like to see this decision apply to free speech zones like Bush used.

I don’t like giving anti-abortion crazies a win, but there is another solution (parking lots on private property) and free speech should be broadly protected. I hope this precedent applies to free speech from the left.

To the Right, freedom of speech means preventing the Left’s freedom of speech. It’s true. That’s why they always feel victimized. They will see no contradiction in Bush’s ‘free speech zones’ and their feeling that trampling on others free speech is their constitutional prerogative.

If this country wants to go all Biblical, I’d say ‘an eye for an eye’ works for me.

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.